Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Beth Shak's ex-husband is hitting where it hurts - her shoe collection. Shak is being taken back to court over her allegedly $1 Million shoe collection. Her ex-husband claims the shoes weren't declared in their divorce three years ago.
Shak, a professional poker player, has a love of beautiful footwear and a shoe collection to match. Her closet full of designer heels and flats has appeared all over the media, including MTV Cribs.
Now her ex is claiming that she hid the collection from him and that she owes him more money in the divorce.
New York State, where the divorce took place, follows the equitable distribution model when it comes to dividing up property and assets. A court decides how to fairly distribute a couple's assets which may not end up in a 50-50 split.
Both parties are expected to honestly reveal any assets they hold, even if the other spouse would have known about them. Working with an experienced attorney can help you figure out which items must be declared.
In most cases, personal items like clothing aren't considered as assets during divorce. But Shak's shoes may fall under a different category.
The footwear aficionado allegedly has 1,200 pairs of expensive designer shoes. Her collection includes high-end brands like Christian Louboutin, Jimmy Choo, and Manolo Blahnik according to Philly.com. That kind of volume can be worth a pretty penny and Shak's ex-husband claims the collection is worth $1 Million.
Beth Shak has previously referred to her shoes as a collection similar to cars or watches which could lead to trouble. Expensive collections are often considered assets subject to division in a divorce.
If a court determines that Shak's shoes aren't just for wearing, her ex-husband could be entitled to some of those shoes or at least some of their value.
Shak claims that her husband knew about the shoes since they were displayed in the couple's master bedroom closet when they were married according to New York Post. But that may not be enough if a court determines that the shoes are an asset rather than simply clothing.
Beth Shak could always call his bluff and offer him some used designer heels as part of the divorce settlement. But if she can't part with the shoes, she may have to meet him in court.